Ballots to remain uncounted in MI and Stein blocked in Philly. Guest: Election integrity, law expert Paul Lehto says this proves 'only option is to get it right on Election Night'. Also: Trump taps climate denier, fossil-fuel tool for EPA...

It is a pleasure to be here at The BRAD BLOG. Many thanks to Brad Friedman, Paul Lehto, Winter Patriot, and Emily Levy, to name those I know, for their show of courage, intelligence, and patriotism in the California 50th Congressional District recount case. Sunshine is a great tonic.

Why does Mexico matter?

Mexico matters because the people and leaders knew election problems were coming and they did something about it. They protested in massive numbers, again and again. The Mexican people are offering the largest resistance to election fraud in modern history. Think of the demonstrations in the Ukraine, Belarus, the Georgia Republic, or any other post election protest. Over a period of 15 days, there were three Assemblies sponsored by Lopez-Obrador and the Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD). These demonstrations attract over a million people (in a nation of 100 million). The corporate media tried to downplay the crowd size with Bloomberg News failing to mention a 1.1 million estimate it got on July 16 from police authorities. These are vibrant, involved people who work with their leaders, particularly Presidential candidate Lopez-Obrador, to develop plans and fend off attacks by the ruling party.Mexico matters because the people and leaders refused to give up when the system failed to give them a real recount. The independent election institute tried to pass off a Calderon victory without investigating the numerous and substantial allegations of election fraud. For example, the institute tried to announce a victory by President Vincente Fox’s hand-picked candidate, Calderon, until an audience member pointed out ballots that they failed to count --- at least 2.5 million of them. That type of "error" is rarely an error; rather, it shows bias and intent to deceive. The electoral tribunal resisted but was ultimately pressured into a recount of 9% of the vote. The tribunal then refused to order a total recount of the paper ballots even though it found that 130,000 were either missing or invalid --- in only 9% of the precincts! The projected total for 100% of the precincts would be over 1.3 million ballots. Yet the full recount failed to materialize.

A politician comfortable with the people.

Even with these disappointments, the people didn't pack up and go home. Citizens occupied key parts of the city, parked themselves in front of foreign banks and other key facilities, and set up camp in the streets vowing to stay until a recount of "every ballot in every precinct" was completed. With each insult to democracy, Obrador and the PRD responded. When the ruling government made plans to install Calderon, Obrador announced the creation of a parallel government run by PRD due to the problem of legitimacy. Fox and Calderon are playing checkers against Obrador’s fast-paced game of chess.

The demonstrations derive from real outrage on the part of the Mexican people. Months prior to the election, the Fox government showed their fear of Obrador’s popularity when Fox tried to prosecute Obrador on what was widely viewed as a trumped-up charge. The net effect would have been disqualification from holding office! That prosecution failed miserably. The anti-democratic forces represented by the Bush-allied Fox government were not finished.

During the election, President Fox ran media advertisements attacking Lopez-Obrador, a clear violation of Mexican campaign law. Fox was censured for doing this and had to cease and desist. There were also reports of huge sums of government money being diverted to governors to create a "commercial vote," votes for cash or benefits. When the votes were being counted, they were reported to a supposedly "independent" election institute.

After examining evidence form the election, Professor James K. Galbraith of the University of Texas concluded his analysis with these findings: (a) Obrador started out 126,000 votes in the hole (to Calderon's even start); (b) this error was never corrected; and (c) at the end of the night "adjustments" were made to make it appear Calderon won. There is an active community of academics in Mexico who are providing analyses demonstrating this absurdity.

This will sound familiar. Calderon's brother-in-law wrote the software program that tabulated and reported votes for the "independent" election institute. The brother-in-law denied this but Mexico's press actually investigates these things and forced him to admit his involvement by producing contracts his company had with the institute.

There's much more that you won't hear about in the corporate media. The New York Times called it a "normal election" and that sentiment was echoed throughout the American press. Just yesterday, Cicy Connelly of the Washington Post dismissed the numerous instances of fraud as "flimsy" evidence on the basis of just one DC-based academic. They are without shame.

What are the lessons for us? Be prepared to fight fraud. Prior to the election many activist groups armed themselves with documentation strategies to capture fraud as it occurred. When you know it's fixed, stand up and protest. The casual forgetting of 2.5 million votes, the statistical problems with the winning candidate's in-law-authored tabulation software, and the dirty tricks to knock Obrador out of the race before it started all served as warnings. The intended victims were not about to be victimized. They prepared and protested immediately. They were told to be mature about the process and expect cheating. When that happened, they upped the ante and began massive protests. Now they say loudly, in unison, "We do not consent" as they form parallel social and governmental structures. They've have had enough!

They've had enough. When will we reach that point? A study of their courage, strategy and tactics is well worth our time. As we do that, it is important to speak up, share information, and spread the word --- the Mexican people and their leaders are the heroes of democracy.

It really is a moment for great pride. For too long, the general attitude toward Mexico has failed to distinguish between the government (sic) and the people, who are terrific. They are doing our work, speaking truth to power and acting on those words.

Great reporting, Michael Collins! much as I admire the ganas of the AMLO protestors, a constant fear nags at me. It's not the memory of Tlatelolco but the more recent Acteal. Soldiers slaughter 45 women and children because they are pesky indias indio who won't die off and let monied interests take over their land. Mexico's filthy rich and government--but I repeat myself--have no compunctions about killing indians and mestizos. And when I look across that sea of faces in el zocalo, that's all I see, indios and mestizos. Acteal. Zocalo.

Wow, that’s want freedom looks like. Mexico is showing the world how democracy works. Good for them, now if we can get our lazy Americans to stand up and take too the streets to get our country back from these stealing criminals.

This was the year, 1997, that the government grilled Echeverria, former President and Interior Minister when the 1968 massacre took place. He all but admitted he ordered the shooting of 300 people and was charged with genocide. You're right MSedano in the concern about the ethnic and racial elements in Mexico right now. The further south, the more the resistance and conflict. These people were, I understand, at church and they were part of a group in Chiapas that had given up violence. The Mayan people of this region suffer needlessly, like the poor of Mexico City do. There is an intersection of class and ethnicity that divides people. Just as guest workers are viewed as a problem here (unless you want your house built), I suspect that the poor and indians/mestizos are viewed as a problem by the elites in Mexico. Obrador and PRD are the only national political entity that works for the interests of the poor and disenfranchised.

I love what's happening in Mexico but who in the Democratic Party would do what Obrador is doing? The Republicans will probably continue to do exactly what they're doing in 2006 and 2008. I mean, I'd like to think Hillary Clinton or John Kerry would order blockades of New York and DC if there's a bad vote count but I doubt it...

All my life, Mexico and Mexicanos have been slimed and insulted and portrayed as filthy, thieving, lowlives—in the press, in the movies, and in the streets. While some neo-nativists today are still trying to infect our minds with this meme, and while the White power structure in place has many well-entrenched facets of racism against non-Whites, we are finally getting some respect. And it feels good. Thank you for being a part of this new awareness.

All my life, Mexico and Mexicanos have been slimed and insulted and portrayed as filthy, thieving, lowlives—in the press, in the movies, and in the streets. While some neo-nativists today are still trying to infect our minds with this meme, and while the White power structure in place has many well-entrenched facets of racism against non-Whites, we are finally getting some respect. And it feels good. Thank you for being a part of this new awareness.

Phil, that would be a true Independence Day. Kerry, maybe, Hillary, nah;)

You are right. The Republicans are impelled, like the PAN party, to stay in power. The last thing they can stand is a serious round of investigations. It's apparent by their behavior. See this. They stopped a recount becasue they got a court to say when the Speaker swears in a member, the election process is over, regardles sof what's happening. Four days after that CA decision (Busby-Bilbray Recount case), a Nevada judge refulsed a recount in a Republican primary because onlyi the Speaker had authority over the final word in House elections (crazy but true). Check this out

I confess there was a good deal of what you said in my mind as I wrote the article which is now on Obrador's web site (click on "ALMO" below his picture, in Spanish too) and this article as well.

Growing up in California back in the day, I saw the modern Chicano movement emerge and it was a sight to see!

Obrador and PRD were ripped off, that's the primary story but the role reverssal for us is healthy. We must follow or we're doomed. They've stood against a nasty crew with courage and consistency. The American press has, by and large, been dreadful except for one recent LA Times article, which conclues that Obrador is the only leader in Mexico who looks like a leader. They left out one key point. Like any great leader, he follows the people who are ready to roll, they've had it. Here are some good pics from the demonstrations.

While mexico has had a long history of electoral fraud which lingers in our collective subconscious, 20 years of political reform have created trustworthy electoral institutions.

Our election system has so many safeguards, it borders on the paranoid: The Voter's picture ID, secured wit fingerprint, barcode and magnetic band, plus microprint and a hologram. The ballot roll, which includes the same pictures as the voter's ID. The electoral authority (IFE), which is a citizen's organization, independent of the government. The electoral tribunal, which is a part of the Judicial branch of government.

The ballots themselves, unfalsifiable, with safeguards such as microprint and encrypted validation 2Dbarcode. Electoral observers from each party at every ballot station. Open Counting at the ballot station by the citizens, and in the presence of anyone who cares to do so. International observers. Regulated Exit Polls. An official Scientific quick-count, performed by mexico's top mathematicians and staticians. A preliminary results program.

All this is the result of 20 years of political negotiantion by the oposition, trying to stand in a fair fight against the government-sponsored PRI.

Do not be fooled, the quick-count and the PREP had the same resuls: too close to call. so did all the exit polls. Moreover, the official recount (ballots were counted at the polling stations, then recounted at the district offices) confirmed this: too close, a razor thin margin for the winner.

There was no fraud. The loosing candidate has insisted and remembered all the years of real electoral fraud, which is highly improbable given the electoral framework, it is more a strategy to obtain power not trough elections but from demonstrations. The fraud argument is just the catalyzer to anger the masses and call to them.

Make no mistake: Lopez Obrador has done this at least twice before in his political carreer: Creating a pararell government and doing massive demonstrations.

One thing is true: we,the mexican people do not stand idle before electoral fraud. We have a long history of standig up and demonstrating, mobilizing and civil resistance against electoral fraud. Lopez Obrador is just capitalizing on our pathological fear and loathing of electoral fraud to get his revolution started.

"Poor Mexico.. so far from God and so close to the United States..."
I think the first time that was used was in the time of Porfirio Dias, right before the Mexican Revolution.

I, too, am very proud of the Mexicans.They have been pushed too far, and things cannot continue as they have in the past.

Too many poor people, without jobs, without land, without hope.
Too many rich people getting richer every year.
Too close an associaton with the Bush Administration, which wants to go deeper, pillage harder, increase profits even more. Which wants to build a toll super highway through the U.S.,through Mexico, to Central American, to furthur rape those desperately poor countries.

YA, BASTA!!!!! ENOUGH!

I live in Mexico. I don't know that is going to happen...but enough anger is fermenting through the country ( see what is happening in Oaxaca..), to tell me that change - perhaps big change - is in the air.

National Alliance for Human Rights Director and Cal State Riverside Chicano Studies Professor, Dr. Armando Navarro will be heading the Mexican-American delegation to El Zocalo on Sept. 14, ’06.

Lopez Obrador plans to speak to his millions of supporters on the 16 of Sept., Mexican Independence day, on what his future intentions are as leader of the left. International delegations will be present as observers and human rights activists, although President Fox has vowed to stop any foreigners who attempt to involve themselves in Mexican politics.

Many people fear that the Mexican government agents, embedded into the millions of peaceful supporters, will attempt to incite riots which will give the government the excuse it needs to order the military on the people.

Flashback to Mexico City, 1968: The Tlatelolco Massacre of October killed hundreds of people. And then there were the arrests were demonstrators were indiscriminately beaten. Then President Ordaz ordered the Mexican military on their own people. The Army fired live rounds into the crowd while hiding in tanks and armored vehicles. Their official body count was even more demeaning: 4 dead, 20 wounded.

Now in the age of live feeds and blogger software President Fox would be ill advised to attempt to follow Ordaz’s example. Even if they do control the Telmex network they should still smile for the cameras because they will most likely be able to see themselves on YouTube.com within just a few minutes. Whether or not this is enough to stop the Mexican military from firing live rounds on their own people remains to be seen, however.

One possible outcome might be that a new revolution begins in Mexico, killing possibly hundreds of thousands of people. But if the left wins there will be a much faster move towards resolving the gross inequalities in the income distribution curve.

Another possibility is that once Calderon takes office (assuming he does take office), deals are made between the illegitimate regime and wore out factions of the leftists coalition; hence, getting the wheels of day to day Mexican life back to normal once

Recently, leftist politicians rose up from their seats and marched down to the podium in the Mexican congress preventing fox from delivering his State of the Union speech to Congress. Avoiding confrontation, Fox left, but returned later to deliver his speech by television. Standing, he looked like a guest on the Tonight Show.

There is little doubt that Calderon didn’t win the election, but that Andres Lopez Obrador was robbed of it.

#13,
Did you even read this post?
"...Calderon's brother-in-law wrote the software program that tabulated and reported votes for the "independent" election institute. The brother-in-law denied this but Mexico's press actually investigates these things and forced him to admit his involvement by producing contracts his company had with the institute..."

Many here in the US claim our elections, also, are just fine. Seconds, it seemed, after someone first suggested that our election system may have been compromised, there were cries of "conspiracy theories!" and "Where's the proof?!"

The vote counting software was written by the Calderon business interest. Supposedly the family sold their stock rectifying any perceived inproprieties. However, the software was hacked during the actual vote counting process which delivered "funny" numbers as results.

Obviously,the software writer knows his own software's vulnerabilities. Which could possibly mean that even he couldve done the hacking.

Thank you Michael for this post and your hard work investigating election fraud in Mexico. I live close to the Canadian border in the US and so get their news. They have a right wing PM now, Stephen Harper, and I'm sure the plan is to have a fascist north american continent. When Israel invaded Lebanon Harper's poll numbers went down because he supported the invasion. A Canadian poll stated 70% of their country was following the story. Would 70% of our country follow what is going on in Israel with our tax dollars? I think that with the problem of election fraud...state media is just as big a peril to democracy. Before I sold my farm, I could not afford a computer, magazines or newspapers. I had a vague feeling something was wrong in 2000 and looked really hard for facts. Was living in westerm N.C. near Ashville, even the libraries had right wing books. Some states are worse than others. Moved to Maine and was surprised that the Bangor News actually was pretty non partisan . That stopped when Bush come up for earth day several years ago. The paper reported that he brought in supporters by bus and wasn't very flattering. Over night the paper became a rag and I cancelled my subscription.Same thing is going on with air america radio now. The thugs aren't slowing down because their poll numbers are tanking. Do you have suggestions as to what we can do. Low subscriptions and viewers on TV doesn't seem to make a difference.

The first step to something actually happening is (1) that some person or persons needs to imagine that it *could* happen. Then the second step is (2) they *act* on that dream of their imagination, and then (3) the dream either does or doesn't happen, regardless of whether the odds are in favor of it or seemingly against it.

I question the wisdom of posts that (in effect) discourage steps one and two, in the context of defending democracy. This happens when people make statements limiting what is possible (#1) or for example suggest that action won't be worthwhile or successful and so nothing should be done (#2). OTher examples could be given of things that undermine one and two.

The reason I question any posts or replies that question or impede dreaming of defending democracy or making it occur (even against the odds) is because our defense of democracy should not depend on whether we calculate that it is a "winner" or not. It's not a game. If it's democracy we should go down with the Alamo if necessary (pardon that analogy here). If it's democracy the only reason we'd avoid the fight would be a purely strategic decision to fight somewhere else, but not at all because it's not worth fighting for in the first place or because 'we might lose.' Excuse me? You mean we'll only defend democracy if we're pretty well assured of victory?

"who in the Democratic Party would do what Obrador is doing? The Republicans will probably continue to do exactly what they're doing in 2006 and 2008. I mean, I'd like to think Hillary Clinton or John Kerry would order blockades of New York and DC if there's a bad vote count but I doubt it…"

I agree with the post in the sense that there are forces making mass demonstrations led by Kerry Or Clinton against the odds, but repeating it here MAKES IT EVEN MORE LIKELY TO BE TRUE because it encourages everyone else to think that such actions by Clinton or Kerry are outside even our capacity to DREAM. For godsakes, that's a high standard!! If we can't get it up for democratic elections on bradblog, well then... (Oops! Did I just break my own rule??)

Sure, people have doubts, but we are trying to build a movement based on confidence and solidarity. Everyone has the right to their opinion, BUT IF YOU REALLY WISH THE MOVEMENT WELL, YOU WILL BUILD IT, not in effect depress it.

We are talking only about a little change in consciousness and heart that we can see in people as they get the message, so it's only a question of getting the message out enough...

If "it" is dreaming of a massive protest, and in effect we are saying

"IT" Can't Happen Here...

Then it follows that "IT", this time meaning an un-free un-democratic fascist state MOST CERTAINLY CAN HAPPEN HERE. Thus, the unwillingness or inability to even imagine such solidarity kinda messes us up in a big way, eh? And years ago we wouldn't have even DREAMED that possible in the USA, now would we?!!

Politics is the sum net total of the citizenry's dreams, assuming fair elections.

Now, to assist in imagining this solidarity we have to work so hard to "dream up" that we'll be labeled impossible idealists, we have in fact the actual Zogby poll showing 92% support for public witnessing of vote counting and access to information on vote counting. Tell all your doubting friends to google Zogby 92%. It'll getcha back here to bradblog and a whole bunch of other good places.

Michael Collins has another great piece, and I humbly offer that he quotes me on the 50th Congressional District election contest and the Zogby poll:

"The shutdown of any possibility of a court based investigation of the CA50 race could not be in more stark contrast to the 92% support for election transparency in the Zogby poll. The contrast between the two sides now could not be clearer. The question of the moment is whether and to what extent the 92% can discover its own supermajority status, or to what extent they continue to be deceived, deluded and distracted by illusions of their own powerlessness."

Let's be careful what we dream for and reinforce and on what limits we inadvertantly put on OTHERS' dreams as we describe our own frustrations and fears. Somebody really famous in voting and civil rights said Keep Your Eyes on the Prize. I'm just a lot wordier than that.

You have one point that needs to be stressed. The structure of Mexico’s electoral system is superior to ours, if that structure has integrity. The administration of the election is conducted by what is supposed to be in independent institute, arms length from the government. We don’t have that. In states, the chief elections officer is a partisan and they often run for other office while holding the elections office. There is a special court to adjudicate claims of fraud quickly. Here, we’re luck to get a case.

Having said that, you response lacks any further credibility.

The independent election institute is note independent. Calderon’s brother in law had the contract to write the software for the institute, that’s a candidate’s relative, bias, prejudice, a fix. Of course, the brother in law denied this but Mexico has something else we don’t have, a free press. They produced the contracts and the relative had to confess. An insider deal with extreme bias (it was tabulation software, vote counting) accompanies by lies. The lies about the contract indicate clear GUILT.

But here’s the absolute proof that fraud took place. Let us have a real investigation to determine this. Prof. J.K. Galbraith says, La Jornada on July 16 charges that 40% of the vote packets have been illegally reopened by the IFE (independent institute) since the election. This amounts to a pre-emptive strike against the credibility of any recount. The charges, if true, are tantamount to proof of fraud, evidence prima facie that AMLO won the election.

The institute put in the ultimate fix. If, somehow, the electoral court had ordered a recount, it would be invalidated. Thus, the only results would be the If’s original results showing Calderon the winner. This is a pure work of genius.

Since you are committed to election integrity, demand that this be investigated. How many seals were broken? By whom? If it is IFE, the independent institute, then we know for sure, no doubt about it, that there was fraud.

Here is what you didn’t respond to

1. The attempt to charge Obrador in a way that would disqualify him from running for President. This was ridiculous and it was the reason for his previous demonstrations.
2. The illegal advertisements by Fox and his party that had to be stopped – slandering Obrador, a clear violation of your election law.
3. The 2.5 million ballots that IFE forgot to mention when they announced the firs results. They had to be reminded. Oops…

How about this:

* In 3,074 precincts (29 percent of those recounted), 45,890 illegal votes, above the number of voters who cast ballots in each polling place, were found stuffed inside the ballot boxes (an average of 15 for each of these precincts, primarily in strongholds of the National Action Party, known as the PAN, of President Vicente Fox and his candidate, Felipe Calderón).
* In 4,368 precincts (41 percent of those recounted), 80,392 ballots of citizens who did vote are missing (an average of 18 votes in each of these precincts).
* Together, these 7,442 precincts contain about 70 percent of the ballots recounted. The total amount of ballots either stolen or forged ads up to 126,282 votes altered. The Narco News Bulletin - Al Giordano 08/14/2006

In Guanajuato's District 13, one of 300 electoral districts across Mexico, Calderón piled up a 44,000 vote margin, equivalent to almost one-fifth of his nationwide edge over López Obrador, candidate of the Democratic Revolution Party, or PRD.

Your pride should be in the people who have courage enough to exemplify the great words of Thomas Jefferson, who said:

"I have sworn upon the alter of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."

Regarding the 7 member Federal Electoral Tribunal, 6 are due to retire soon and it is rumored that the PAN/PRI warned them about the standard of living they could face during retirement if they did not play along.

What a difficult question. Why is the Corporate Media (CM) still complicit with the * administration when support by their audience is clearly in free-fall, heading below 30% soon? I just read a piece by a Time Magazine reporter, Tad Padgett, that was clearly insulting to PRD and Obrador. I wondered why. Then I saw a news item indicating that the new editor of Time used to run a right wing foundation which gave to ultra conservative causes. Tad was clearly scoring brownie points with the new boss.

We're clearly living in the Potemkin Village version of democracy with institutions operating as though the votes count, in government and commerce, but with no responsiveness to those who vote. We vote, they don't not counted properly. We indicate preferences, they're not reflected in the type of media or products that we want.

They don't care, they don't have to...they think.

But there's a new day coming. Soon, there will be no need for Time, no need for the major networks, as they were; no need for the fake elections and skewed, unrepresentative results. There will be no need for the deception either. It's all coming to a head in November 2006 for us, right now for Mexico.

What do we do when there is NO change in party control in either house of Congress in 2006? A great deal since many will vote and ever increasing numbers of people are simply fed up with the one trick pony routing of playing lip service to democracy.

Give us free and fair elections or we'll hold them ourselves. Once we have a fair election (no money, no electoin fraud) and we will fix things.

Oops, I see in my #5 post I put the word “want” it should have been what. I guess my self-conscious was taking over when I wrote that word. Paul Lehto # 24, beautifully said. Msedano #18, Thanks for the link, now that is what I’m talking about. If we could of only did that after the 2000, or 2004 election maybe America would be at peace now. Let's not ever sit quietly again when there is injustice. Peace.

je-je! michael, you caught me apologizing! dang. the universe may now collapse.

and thanks for those pic links. inspiring!

and to another commenter, it's not just Oaxaca and the TRIFE, it's also happening in Mérida, Yucatán, if you check my blog (gotta run can't link at the moment), you'll see a post i wrote a few hours ago about a bombing on the offices of Por Esto!, after soaking up some Narco News Bulletin, or you can go right there....

Re: Collins and "fighting the good fight". Probably should have added that there are differences between defending democracy and attacking on its behalf. (don't want to support ill advised attacks willy nilly). Also if something is in the nature of a CLASS ACTION or somehow binding on others actually or potentially, more caution is required.

But in general people greatly over-do the caution and doubt thing, to the great damage of democracy, my main point in #24 above. It even prevents them, in the habit of cautionary analysis, from developing the solidarity that leads to events as in Mexico.

The caution and doubt even prevents people from finding out how frequently people really do feel the same way. Then, the ripples don't go out, they don't reinforce, and VOILA no mexico city events in the USA! Gee, how did that happen?

It's like the problem with academics and overly intellectual folks, always over-analyzing. If the equivalent of a mass murderer walks into the room, the academic intellectual will analyze and muse that it could be a halloween costume, it could be the person found the wrong house and will soon depart, .... Politicians don't ever want to be "wrong" so they will freeze in place rather than take the 5% risk that the guy walking into the room with a semiautomatic weapon is a prank. It's better to be alive and get scared, because being alive also pays off in OTHER AREAS OF LIFE. Sometimes you need to call a spade a spade, too.

NOTE WELL: ACADEMICS and POLITICIANS like those above will never defend democracy against anything like a risk level that's *perceived* as 25% or less, they want to be 'responsible' and not make fools of themselves, seemingly. The huge problem here is that democracy needs sentinels and protectors, and to be a sentinel MEANS to get off your fat butt and investigate the noise in the night, even if the chance is less than 25% that there's a real problem. We do this because ignoring those small risks eventually results in huge loss. That's why I like to refer to people who are "sentinels of democracy" or "defenders of democracy."

Luckily the Mexicans have their political analysis support and check/balance but not block their political passion.

# 35 Sally
I agree we do need a leader. Media "cough" That's one of the reasons I got rid of my cable, they don't report what's going on. I find out more on the internet than I could ever find out watching cable. Thank god "Gore" for the internet. I’m not sure if the Mexican press is reporting this. I mostly go to http://narconews.com/ when I want to find out what’s going on in Mexico, and now Brads blog, which I think is great. Greg Palast also did some investigative reporting of Mexico’s election.

Certain organizations in the US such as the women’s groups who brought the million men and women have the ability to bring out large groups of people.

Getting this group and many others to take up the cause and inform their members could be the way to start. What about the trade unions that are definitely at risk under right wing dictatorship. Getting existing groups of many types “even if you don’t agree with their ideology” to support this cause and bring their members into the streets might turn the tide.

What a wonderful thread. If this doesn't inspire us nothing will. Yes the Mexican people are an inspiration to me . Thats why the American MSM will not report this story. Remember 2004 when we needed the MSM to report our Election Dysfunction and all we heard about was The Ukraine. I cried almost every day over that, but no more It is time for action not tears! Thank You Michael and Paul, for putting this into perspective for me!

Obrador's threat to set up a parallel government is HIGHLY dangerous, as I posted in the lower thread. That remains the case. Obrador runs a high risk of letting his rhetoric run away with him, and getting thousands of his followers killed meaninglessly. It has happened before in Mexico...this is dancing on cluster bomblets.

I would prefer that Mexico retain its Constitutional government, and attempt to resolve the vote-fraud through peaceful means, preferably through the legal system. But I am not well-educated in the design of the Mexican government and law, so I leave it there.

There is a definite risk of a US invasion of Mexico if there is violence against the government. No one here (except me) has mentioned that or factored that in --- mainly because of a desire to see only the positive side of mass public protest. Well, it's only positive if it remains peaceful.

When Calderon takes power, the Mexican Constitution will still stand. The legislature will still be open. The rhetoric that attempts to turn this case of massive vote-fraud into a Bushco level coup is not supported by any clearcut facts. After 70 years of PRI rule, a stolen election is not the end of the Republic.

It would be far better NOT to have a US invasion. Leftist rhetoric inflates the crisis, while ignoring the counter-effect. And, once again, I'll mention Martin Luther, and his image of society as a drunk trying to mount his donkey to go home. He climbs up one side, and falls down the other, and then does it again.

The meaning of that story in this case is that it is best to work within the legal framework to produce changes that don't simply reverse once the clampdown comes, with great loss of life. But that isn't the leftist way. Actually, it's amazing that leftists come to www.bradblog.com in the first place. For the last six years, it is has been almost impossible to find any leftist concerned about the vote-fraud in the U.S. They just talk about waiting for the revolution, and about how both parties are equally corrupt and power-grubbing, to quote the lower thread.

I am quite glad that Brad works within the system as well as in the grassroots. Because our headway on this issue is NOT coming from Democracy Now! It's coming from his hard work, and that of lawyers and activists who see the sense in incremental reversal of massive vote-fraud, rather than just waiting for the perfect (and preferably bloody) revolution.

I want to address the comments and questions about activism here based on what's going on in Mexico. But first I want to address Paul in LA' s thoughtful comments (#41).

Obrador sought to work within the Mexican legal system. A few years ago, a long process of examination and protest about dirty elections resulted in an excellent structure - an independent election institute that would handle voting, tabulation etc. and a special tribunal to handle disputes. As I pointed out above, that process, while good in structure, failed in practice. At every turn, PRD had to push to get any action out of the institute (including being aware of 2.5 million ballots) and when they did, and there were major problems 126,000 disqualified ballots indicating attempted fraud, the problems were dismissed. Obrador and PRD had two choices: 1) accept the unacceptable, the treatment and opportunities for the poor, the Indians, the mestizos, and those with any degree of social consciousness or 2) protest the second election like this in the past 20 years. They chose the path of intellectually honesty and integrity. There was no other choice.

Calderon should have kept his brother out of the contract for election institute software if he wanted no controversy.

Calderon should have told Fox to stop the attack ads against Obrador, which were determined to be a violation of Mexican election law and obviously so.

Calderon should be making motions to work out something with PRD. Is he? I doubt it, but I'd be very happy if I'm wrong.

PRD has been very clear that their efforts are peaceful. It is the PAN government that represents the potential threat. In "addressing" a general strike lead by teachers in Oaxaca a few weeks back, the central government sent helicopters to spray tear gas on those demonstrators in the early hours of the morning, mostly women. Then troops approached on the ground and cleared a central square of the demonstrators. They were sleeping and tear gassed. This is well documented.

Mexico has at least 1/2 of its population living in poverty, their needs go unaddressed, and it's time to do something. These are Obrador's people. God bless him for caring and living his philosophy. He will not abandon the constituency.

Nobody is threatening violence on PRD's part. It's Gandhi and King, quite a tradition. It's based on real charges of election fraud with more than enough evidence to warrant a recount. But guess what, it's believed that 40% of the ballot box/bag seals have been broken by the so called "independent" institute. Prof. James K Galbraith of Univ of Texas discussed this and said it was flat out proof of fraud, because, if correct (and it would be fairly easy to determine), it means that the outcome of any recount was INVALIDATES since the seals are broken, indicating that tampering could take place.

It's not Obrador who started this, nor is it PRD who has the ability to inflict violence. This is a peaceful movement. We had a movement to free ourselves after all and it wasn't all that peaceful. What's wrong with their efforts? It is their responsibility to seek justice when denied, that's Obrador, the leadership, and the people.

If Calderon is a gentleman, he will insist on a recount and an investigation of the well substantiated charges of fraud. He will say, "I cannot rule Mexico if I cannot prove to the people that I was, in fact elected." That would be one of the greatest moves of any politician ever. Since he's not seeking my advice, I'm not expecting anything like that. Secondary to that move of pure integrity, he could reach out for a coalition government and give PRD some of their key demands. That would also be a move of real skill and show some flair.

We will see what he does. If he resorts to violence or if Fox does so for his benefit, he will be judged to be a very weak leader. The LA Times had one of the few articles in the CM that actually made sense recently. The point was the frustration with traffic and inconvenience works to Calderon's benefit. The larger issue of who the real leader is has been settled for now. It's Obrador given the response to unfairness and concern for his people. The author pointed out that he looks like a much stronger leader than either Fox or Calderon.

There needs to be an open investigation into the election. There needs to be power sharing short of that basic right of all voters. As for leftists on this board, when it comes to elections and voting rights, I like Paul Lehto’s words: “Just tell them Thomas Jefferson sent you.” Liberals, conservatives, moderates, libertarians … all Americans need a strong interest and stance against election fraud, wherever it arises. When it occurs in our neighborhood with a

Btw, I commented extensively in “Scoop” on the left and election fraud, particularly Mark Hertzgaard in Mother Jones and Fahrad Manjoo in Salon. It’s a good read (click on “Print” for the best view of the links).

There is a definite risk of a US invasion of Mexico if there is violence against the government. No one here (except me) has mentioned that or factored that in — mainly because of a desire to see only the positive side of mass public protest. Well, it's only positive if it remains peaceful.

Just like the Boston Tea Party. And the American Revolution. These were positive because they were peaceful.

Watch out for absolute statements. They are almost always wrong by the inherent nature of such.

Do you want to know what is always positive? Truth. And acting on it. Despite your fears.

It's one thing to invade island states or Panama, years ago. It is quite another to invade Mexico and I don't now why that would have come up. Talk about a united front against any action by us. But that won't happen. Rove is entirely to intelligent to even allow it to be considered.

You are right about "absolutes." This is an elaborate game of chess on Obrador's and PRD's part. It's all about the integrity and openness of the election process. THEY CAN RECOUNT THE BALLOTS. Why not? Oh, I know. We might just find out that the "independent" institute broke the seals on so many ballot boxes, it rendered a recount meaningless due to tampering. Wouldn't that be a topic to investigate before things are closed out. Lehto, buy your ticket and get down there right away!!! I'll meet you there.

1. Paul in LA: What sort of “freedom” is it if people have to measure whether to engage in peaceful, lawful activities out of fear of being murdered by their own government or invaded by their neighbors? That is no freedom at all.

The PRD understands that. That is why they have started down a road from which there is no return. They have, in a very real way, pledged their lives, their fortune, and their sacred honor to the cause of freedom.

A little respect, please?

2. Mr. Chachalacas: Please accept my congratulations on the organized, well-funded PANista campaign. Unfortunately, thanks to the thuggish behavior of a number of your members, not to mention the Fox-sponsored deaths squads in the Yucatan and in Oaxaca, it’s become very clear to me that the PRI has mutated into the PAN. All of those wonderful safeguards you mentioned and yet by the IFE’s own measurement, only half of the precincts could account for their ballots.

3. One of the PAN’s main talking points is that a full recount was not possible because Mexican law does not allow it. But (a) if the PAN had petitioned the court to do a recount because of the widespread public perception that there had been fraud, the court had the power to accede, and (b) the magazine Proceso is attempting to get access to the ballots, which are public records, to do a recount. The PAN could join that effort. Instead, one publication has reported that the court has been bribed. In Mexico, alas, one can never discount such reports.

"It's not Obrador who started this, nor is it PRD who has the ability to inflict violence. This is a peaceful movement."

Michael, threatening to establish a parallel government is not a peaceful act. It is SEDITION.

'Infliction' of violence is of course in the power of the Army, not the population per se. But even minor acts of violence can be used as a pretext for the clampdown, which has happened in Mexico repeatedly.

I agree that the situation is clearly not Obrador's fault, but his rhetoric is being reported in order to inflame. He has to be very careful, because Big Brother en el Norte has put Marines into Mexico on several occasions. There are rumors that US special forces are already deployed there.

Obrador saying that he would never accept Calderon's government is another statement that I would hope he has thought better of --- not because he needs to accept the C. gov't, but because such statements only inflame the situation.

Obrador should wrap himself in the Constitution, and make LEGAL statements, not inflammatory illegal statements (or statements which can be interpreted in that way for the purposes of repression).

"1. Paul in LA: What sort of “freedom” is it if people have to measure whether to engage in peaceful, lawful activities out of fear of being murdered by their own government or invaded by their neighbors? That is no freedom at all."

Who is discussing 'peaceful, lawful activities'? I am talking about the danger, the very real danger, of the situation --- something that I find very short-sheeted in the discussion here.

"The PRD understands that. That is why they have started down a road from which there is no return."

Wow. That's great rhetoric. I wonder how many people that kind of logic can kill, without accomplishing anything?

I'm pretty sure that leftists can't consider Luther's drunk. They just want to jump up on their side of the donkey. When the other side decides to jump, look out. But anyhow, there are two sides to this donkey, and HISTORY shows clearly the very grave danger of ignoring the actual entrenched power in Mexico when crafting a public action.

"Just like the Boston Tea Party. And the American Revolution. These were positive because they were peaceful."

The BTP was a crime against property, by masked guerillas. The American Rev, as I pointed out in the lower thread, was only successful because the FRENCH GOVERNMENT decided to help, in part because of Ben Franklin hobnobbing with ARISTOCRATS.

"Watch out for absolute statements. They are almost always wrong by the inherent nature of such."

Followed by your absolute statement:

"Do you want to know what is always positive? Truth. And acting on it. Despite your fears."

Tell that to the people at Tiananmen square. Ignoring your reasonable fears is a good way to be an EX-protester.

Charles, #46, you say there's a report that the court has been bribed in Mexico.

The way bribes work (and this is not just in Mexico --- we've had leaders assassinated right here in the USA) is that they give you a choice: Plata o plomo. Silver or Lead. A bribe or a bullet.

In the US we have high-tech bullets, like weapons-grade anthrax to "take care of" people who won't go along to get along. After the anthrax attacks, in which only Democrats were targeted, and knowing that the killer is still loose, a Democrat would have to be suicidal to buck the system.

Or brave enough to follow in the tragic footsteps of his father and uncle, in the case of RFK Jr. He spoke of our founders pledging their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor for our freedom. For those who need a leader, if you don't mind a dynast, you've got one.

For those who don't, let's roll!

And no, you don't have to go out in the street and get your head bashed in. Decide how much freedom from tyranny is worth to you, click the Velvet Revolution button, and donate it. It just doesn't get any easier than that.

1. The only thing one ever *needs* freedom or liberty for is to do something that the powers that be don't approve of.

2. Therefore, there is a flowering of freedom or liberty at the moment in Mexico.

3. Absolutely necessary in the flowering of any such freedom/liberty, by virtue of the fact that it involves speech or action in conflict with the purported government, is some kind of *tension.*

4. Now, given this notion of liberty and freedom, although the contours of your position are not entirely clear, it's general nature might be described as "back off on the freedom stuff before someone gets hurt."

We now bring you some messages from our noncommercial sponsors:

"Live Free or Die"

"Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death" -Patrick Henry

"Those who would give up a little liberty to obtain a little security deserve neither." Ben Franklin

I don't know if you'd call the above "leftists" but they didn't think too highly of having their freedom chilled by the King and his redcoats at the point of a bayonet.

I really don't think you need to try to get freedom to chill out here, or in Mexico. I'll bet everyone in the streets is well aware of the possibility in Mexico and doesn't need our reminders. And no one here needs to be chilled in the exercise of their freedoms by your fears of some folks getting killed.

If liberty wasn't, in the end, more important than life itself, it would be impossible to motivate soldiers to risk and sacrifice their lives and security to support freedom and democracy.

So, if soldiers are motivated in significant part by the idea that freedom and democracy are more important than life itself, thus justifying fighting with tanks and automatic guns, then why is it a problem for Mexican citizens, defending freedom and democracy, to use their bodies nonviolently in protest and willingly take the risk that there will be a police riot or shootings?

It CAN'T be the case that we can only fight for freedom and democracy VIOLENTLY and then ONLY IF THE GOVERNMENT SAYS IT'S OK. To believe that would be to be twisted beyond words, in my opinion.

Paul in LA, I say read this and read comment #24, sit back, grab the popcorn and enjoy the freedom, baby. And if some folks get hurt or killed, I would not presume that freedom and democracy was clearly not worth that risk.

Would you?

You may have doubts about the cause in Mexico, in which case it is fruitful to talk about the REAL issue. But if you are in favor of that cause, then I would submit that scaring people with visions of government violence, even though a real risk, is not appropriate as a response for a freedom-loving person not wishing to put a chill on freedom.

"Do you want to know what is always positive? Truth. And acting on it. Despite your fears."

I like to keep things simple, and you nailed it with that one.

This Mexican uprising is impossible to separate from the "elections" we've been having in the US. Indeed, Greg Palsast tells us that some of the same organizations that have been casting doubt on the honesty of ours, are in play.

THIS IS NOTHING MORE OR LESS THEN A BATTLE BETWEEN TRUTH AND FICTION.

Paul in LA:

Just how many stolen elections do you think we should tolerate, before we stand up? I don't own a gun, and have never struck anyone out of anger in my life. But I can't say my imagination isn't running a little wild lately. The Republicans keep shoving things in our face that do us and others great harm, and I am damn tired of it! I do wish they had pulled Bush out of his motercade and taken him to jail for stealing our democracy in 2000! Maybe he would wish the same, considering all of the serious crimes he has committed since then!

You seem to say that our present, (some unelected), rulers will always prevail and if we try to reign them in, WE will start a bloody cataclysm. That is up to THEM! I beleive in my heart and mind that the police and servicemen of America will stand with US, and this whole stupid rewriting of the constitution will fizzle!

If I'm wrong, they will gun me down for standing in the street with a sign, handing out leaftets, and I won't have to spend my senior years fighting a losing battle against the young, and the oppressed people that I did nothing to help!

Great thread! Great comments! Also nice to have some decent pictures from Mexico!

Paul in LA asks, "Who is discussing 'peaceful, lawful activities'? I am talking about the danger, the very real danger, of the situation — something that I find very short-sheeted in the discussion here. "

Lopez Obrador has never, ever suggested anything beyond civil disobedience. Civil disobedience is people lawfully being in places in a manner that's inconvenient.

Setting up a shadow government is done in Britain regularly. It's your imagination running wild that turns this into sedition.

I think you have no idea of how entirely helpless the poor in Mexico are. The right controls absolutely everything. And so, like Gandhi, Lopez Obrador has to find ways to oppose power with powerlessness.

So far, he's doing just fine. It's a shame that some Americans don't understand what kind of moxie it takes to stand down the Mexican state.

But then some so-called liberals were telling Martin Luther King how foolish he was to be sitting in Birmingham jail defending their liberties.

I'm not sure what he has said, but the reported statement that he intends to set up a parallel government is NOT civil disobedience --- it is vulnerable to charges of sedition.

"Setting up a shadow government is done in Britain regularly. It's your imagination running wild that turns this into sedition."

It's not my imagination, it's the PRETEXT FOR GOVERNMENT SUPPRESSION that such statements supply.

"I think you have no idea of how entirely helpless the poor in Mexico are."

I am quite aware of their plight.

"But then some so-called liberals were telling Martin Luther King how foolish he was to be sitting in Birmingham jail defending their liberties."

MLK Jr. sat in jail, endangering no one but himself. Bravo.

I'm a street protester. I'm not a sit-at-home. My comments were in response to the revolutionary tripe I was reading here. People seemed to be encouraged by the possibility of violence --- by the upsetting of the status quo, and a new future for Mexico. Which is fine rhetoric, but it completely ignores the existence of the United States Marine Corps, something Mexicans (and supporters here) should not forget when they are planning their actions.

Why? Because they should be cowards? Because they shouldn't risk their lives? NO, because they may risk their lives in vain, because the situation in Mexico is not one that can be overcome without recognizing El Norte and its willingness to invade Mexico. I prefer that Mexico retain its sovereignty without US invasions.

I also noted, and repeat, that Bushco is PLANNING an invasion of Bolivia, and also Cuba, and also probably Venezuela if 'necessary.' Mexico supplies oil, so it can be added to the list. I oppose all such invasions --- I oppose the coup that has taken over our country --- and I have put my own body on the line probably 400 times since this started. I've been maced; I've been in handcuffs; I've been spat on and punched.

Viva Mexico! Abajo con el Pinche Bush, y el Pinche Calderon. But the safety of protesters is a primary concern of mine, and also I recognize the futility of hot-rhetoric which brings down repression.

"Just how many stolen elections do you think we should tolerate, before we stand up?"

ZERO. But learn from Brad, who to his credit has said that you cannot stop stolen elections AFTERWARD. You can only prevent fraud BEFORE they are held.

"But I can't say my imagination isn't running a little wild lately."

I share your crisis.

"You seem to say that our present, (some unelected), rulers will always prevail and if we try to reign them in, WE will start a bloody cataclysm. That is up to THEM!"

It doesn't matter if it is up to them; of course it is up to them. My concern is that activists are a resource which should not be misled into battles that cannot be won, against impossible odds. I do not want to see Los Ninos Heroes repeated.

"I beleive in my heart and mind that the police and servicemen of America will stand with US, and this whole stupid rewriting of the constitution will fizzle!"

I agree. Indeed, the CHP supervisor told me that they had a meeting in Sacramento, and they decided that they 'wanted to be on the right side of this when it is all over.' I have heard similar statements from LAPD, though ANSWER is busily demonizing every police outfit it can get a violent response out of.

"If I'm wrong, they will gun me down for standing in the street with a sign, handing out leaftets..."

Paul Lehto said "The only thing one ever *needs* freedom or liberty for is to do something that the powers that be don't approve of."

One may 'need' such freedoms, but it isn't worth dying for them, unless there is some chance of WINNING.

Some, maybe most, leftists cling to the idea of the noble suicide. The idea seems to be that their blood will inevitably change the world. I doubt that analysis. I think we have gone quite beyond the flintlock stage of seeking liberty. The Pentagon can turn on its microwave guns, and cook our brains before we come into firing range.

Nonviolent protest is still very powerful. But the rhetoric has to be on the POLITICAL activist side. We MUST work within the system to have any hope of success. And under a coup like the current one, there isn't much success to count up. That's no justification for ignoring the technological changes! That's no justification for endorsing dangerous actions on vague hopes of pure victories.

The leftist obsession with purity is a constant. But in the old days, leftists worked HARD within the system, and on voting rights. I applaud all the leftists here at bradblog who have committed themselves to such positive action for change.

My problem is with the ones who have despaired of impure solutions, and want to die for purity. Politics is dirty. The facts are dirty. Protest is dirty. If you cannot get dirty for freedom, then you value your purity too much to fight for incremental gains. And then, what is there left but revolution?

And so, I have talked with many leftists who DO sit at home. They may march from time to time; but they are entirely disaffiliated. So they won't work for fair elections, and they won't do the door-to-door that their education would make them excellent for. I don't really blame them, but it is a failure for purity that I simply cannot endorse.

It doesn't matter if it is up to them; of course it is up to them. My concern is that activists are a resource which should not be misled into battles that cannot be won, against impossible odds. I do not want to see Los Ninos Heroes repeated

"activists are resources"...Interesting, I am quite positive that the activists in Mexico, which includes millions, actually consider themselves people. They are the people who will have to live in chaos and poverty without relief. And who do these "resources" belong to? You? Is this some sort of chess game?

and then you said:

Some, maybe most, leftists cling to the idea of the noble suicide. The idea seems to be that their blood will inevitably change the world. I doubt that analysis. I think we have gone quite beyond the flintlock stage of seeking liberty. The Pentagon can turn on its microwave guns, and cook our brains before we come into firing range.

Paul in LA, are these the leftists who you later say sit at home and do nothing or the leftist who actually do act? Why try to frighten people out of action with silly remarks like this. Does the Pentagon have some selective microwavable device that picks us out among the general population?

The people in Mexico are acting because their election was stolen. They are acting because they have real world survival issues at stake. They are acting because the apply principles to action and can take no other course.

Gandhi, King, and now Obrador and the Mexicans...you cannot stop the truth or those who wish to tell it with strategic notions of how the "resources" are moved around the board and you cannot scare these people off. They've been wronged and they seek justice...and they may or may not be "leftists" to begin with.

You sound like you've bought Corporate Media's characterization of the PRD and you selling it here, one of the few places where they can get a fair hearing.

Michael Collins said "activists are resources"…Interesting, I am quite positive that the activists in Mexico, which includes millions, actually consider themselves people."

They are resources for change. Are you really going to try to attack me for making that observation?

"Does the Pentagon have some selective microwavable device that picks us out among the general population?"

My meaning was quite obvious. Flintlocks will not work any more.

"They are acting because the apply principles to action and can take no other course."

No other courses exist? That's simply untrue --- an example of leftist fatalism.

"Gandhi, King, and now Obrador and the Mexicans…you cannot stop the truth or those who wish to tell it

Gandhi, murdered, with some millions of dead to follow him within a year or two, a bloody war between the two Pakistans, and now a nuclear standoff between the two resulting states which may still kill millions. King, murdered. Obrador? Very brave, very patriotic, but still, a very, very dangerous situation.

"they may or may not be "leftists" to begin with."

The leftists I'm talking about are HERE, on this board, and Obrador, of course.

"You sound like you've bought Corporate Media's characterization of the PRD and you selling it here, one of the few places where they can get a fair hearing."

If we start looking for a leader we're barking up the wrong tree. Re-read (or read, if you haven't read it yet) War and Peace. Napoleon thought he was leading a charge, but in that he was as fatuous as a surfer who thinks he's leading the wave he's riding. We don't need to find a leader, all we need to do is be the wave, and a "leader" will emerge. It's as simple as that. Are 6 or 7 of us up to it?

Paul in LA says, "I'm not sure what he has said, but the reported statement that he intends to set up a parallel government is NOT civil disobedience — it is vulnerable to charges of sedition."

As Franz Kafka pointed out, any person can be prosecuted by a sufficiently malicious prosecutor. I would suggest that you park your overactive imagination. Merely setting up an alternate government is not illegal. Unless he tries to collect taxes, conscript people, or print currency, I don't think anyone would *dare* prosecute him.

Paul in LA says, "MLK Jr. sat in jail, endangering no one but himself. Bravo."

Amazingly wrong. A number of people died in the civil rights movement led by Martin Luther King. Representative John Lewis was beaten so badly he lost a kidney. I suggest you read Letter from a Birmingham Jail. It's clear to me you do not understand the history.

Paul in LA says, "People seemed to be encouraged by the possibility of violence ..."

I think that's your overactive imagination. What I read is people encouraged that someone, somewhere cares enough about the takeover of their government to risk being the *targets* of violence.

No one wants violence except the right-wing.

Paul in LA says, "I also noted, and repeat, that Bushco is PLANNING an invasion of Bolivia, and also Cuba, and also probably Venezuela if 'necessary.'"

And Iran and Syria. France, too, if Richard Perle had his way.

According to commanders who know, the American army is close to irreversible breakdown.

Im mexican, i live in Mexico City and i voted this past elections. As a mexican that actually cares about politics i have to say a couple of things.

First of all, THERE WAS NO FRAUD in these past elections. There are some points in your argument that are omitted and are VERY important to understand the situation Mexico is living at the moment:

1) There was something called PREP (Preliminar Elections Result Program) that reported after 4 hours of closed precints in all the country. The results started to flow and show at the first hours "online" that AMLO was leading the votation with about 2%. Then slowly that lead became smaller and smaller until Calderon started to take a small but increasingly lead over AMLO. This actually happened in the night and early morning of the next day, but there was not any “adjustment” as you say. That happened because the results from the precints were AMLO won were coming sooner than the precints were Calderon won, that explains why AMLO was leading at the beginning and why Calderon ended first at the end.

2) There were no “casual forgetting” of 2.5 million votes. The IFE (Electoral Federal Institute) told to every political party that aside from the 40 million votes, there were 2.5 millions that were invalid, that was when the result started to flow. Invalid means that election paper (boleta in Spanish, I don’t know how to translate it to English sorry) didn’t portray the election of the person that used it, for example, a election paper with a cross touching two party pictures etc. Leaving aside that, the 2.5 million invalid votes doesn’t mean 2.5 million votes less for AMLO, they were from all the parties (That’s something the PRD has wrongly said all this time)

3) There was no pressure for the TRIFE (Tribunal Electoral del Poder Judicial de la Federación in Spanish) to recount only a small part of the votes because of the following reasons. The only way to do a full recount of the votes is that a political party oppose to ALL the precints (around 130,000) and the reasons from all of them pass the analysis of the 7 judges from the TRIFE. PRD only opposed to 70000 of those precints (the ones were Calderón won or have many votes) so their petition was legally invalid.
The 9% of the 130000 precints were the recount actually occurred passed because the reasons that PRD gave were substantially enough to give “the benefit of a doubt”. The recount happened and the results didn’t vary at all, both Calderon and AMLO lost votes, but the proportion of .50% votes in favor to Calderon didn’t change at all.

I could also argue about that every precint had a party representative that signs a legal document that has the total of votes for each party, those PRD representatives signed those documents, so, if the fraud actually happened, why would they signed for it.

You also don’t mention that at the present moment, more than two thirds of the population believes that there was no fraud at all. Also you don’t mention all the chaos that the camps caused to Mexico City, all the economical repercussions of the affected zones. Also, you are wrong to say that Calderon was the hand-picked candidate of president Fox, that’s so wrong because they actually had a political fight when Calderon presented his resign from the Energy Secretary to start to do things of his own. The hand-picked candidate from president Fox was Santiago Creel, the Gobernor Secretary for like 4-5 years of the actual period. Also you forgot to say that the PRD only opposed against the presidential elections, but they didn’t touch the congress elections. If a fraud happened what would make them thing that only happened with the presidential and not the congress election (Remember that a president is powerless if he doesn’t have the support from the congress, something that happened with the Fox administration)

Also you forget to mention that the parallel government that AMLO is creating will survive from the PEOPLE’S MONEY, the same poor people AMLO is so determined to defend, the same people that struggle every day to earn some coins to feed their family. This is actually very absurd, and sadly, the poor people will give money because they see AMLO as their savior.

Also I have to accept the mistakes happened. The president and the PAN (National Action Party) started a destructive campaign against AMLO, but the PRD followed the same steps and fought back with also destructive publicity.

I hope this can give your comment a more objective point of view, as you failed to portray (intentionally or unintentionally, I hope is the second) all of the realities and perspectives of this Mexican election.

"A real mexican" would have us believe his distortions and absurdities which ignore the facts presented here and extensively elsewhere. He does not warrant a detailed rebuttal. I will note this. "A real mexican" seems to be saying that those who disagree with him are not real Mexicans.

"A real mexican" would have us believe his distortions and absurdities which ignore the facts presented here and extensively elsewhere.

Im not ignoring them, im givin the other point of view you didn't care to give at the beginning

"A real mexican" seems to be saying that those who disagree with him are not real Mexicans.

What seems to be or what doesn't seem to be is not the point, facts are the only thing that matter and it's a fact that im from Mexico, that's why im a Real Mexican , and it's a fact that many of you aren't, not because you disagree with me, because you ACTUALLY aren't.

If you are trying to be objective you have to ask everyone involved in the matter, from POV of people outside Mexico to POV of people that LIVE in Mexico, like me, also POV of people that support AMLO, or people that support Calderon or people that don't support them at all.

It would be best if you actually discuss where is that I am wrong (as i did with your article) and not say that my POV is "Simply Unreal" or whatever else you want to call it just because i gave the POV you failed to give at the beginning, it's just stupid to say that I'm wrong if you don't actually argument WHY im wrong.

Maybe we can discuss a bit further, or you can make a new article about the soon to come November 20th, the day where AMLO will be declared President, unofficialy of course. Im really looking forward to hear what you have to say about that. Have a nice day and thank you very much

You don't deserve the dignity of a reply as you are a professional troll. Your government is now slaughtering innocents in Oaxaca. Congratulations to the Calderon regime. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. You act like you speak for all Mexicans...again. There are millions there tired of having an oligarchy sit on their creativity and talent. They're tired of having Federal troops enter their states and kill them. They're tired of the corruption. The election was stolen there for the same reason it was stolen here...the power structure can't stand an objective review by a different governmnent. You don't get a response because you are not here for one. You're here to pronounce yourself "Mexico" spokesman for everybody. Enough. Go do something about the murder of the American journalist yesterday and the Mexican citiens by Caderon and his mob.

Oaxaca is a very different matter that is not the topic discussed here. And in fact, im actually agree with you in that matter, i don't approve the intervention of federal troops because thats a clear sign that politics failed to solved the problem. I don't approve the use of violence to solve problems.

But one thing is for sure, you CAN'T blame Calderon for all the actions FOX is taking about Oaxaca. It's like to say that the next USA president will be blamed because the actions Bush is taking with the construction of the wall between our nations or the actions Bush is taking against the nuclear testing in North Corea. That's simply an argument that i would believe from a teenager, and is far as i know you aren't one.

I'm not a spokesman for everybody rather than myself. There are 15million Mexicans that don't agree with me (at the very least), there are other 15 million Mexicans that may agree with me, and there are more than 40 million mexicans that didn't decide to portray what they think in the past elections.

Your lack of an objective response and the way you try to imply that i'm in favor of what has been done in Oaxaca just because im defending another point of view tells me that you don't have nothing worth to say, it clearly seems I overstimated your capacity to stablish a logic, coherent, professional and objective discussion about a certain topic.

You are so condescending. I ran this blog over a month ago. Do you think that I'm perpetually on call for your convenience, particularly when you begin with a flight of logic ignoring much of what was in my post. Give it a break. If you want to find out how this was stolen, you'll have to wait until I finish my next round of research on this and build an even stronger case (along with comments on media neglect of the topic here) or, until someone else does, in which case I'll summarize it here. We are having an election of our own so I'm a tad distracted.

You are the "real Mexican" who speaks for "Mexico," which is fine, but you can't tell me what we talk about here. Well, you can but I don't have to listen.

Take a look at these pictures of Oaxaca and ask yourself: How hard would it be for people who deploy thugs like this to steal a few votes? Just ask youself. This is PAN, Fox and Calderon. They are no different than any dictator who deploys the armed forces against citizens. They believe so strongly in their superiority and correctness that acts that support that, killing and roughing up the people, or stealing an election or two really don't matter. Don't pull this know-all routine aobut Mexico. I'm talking about universal traits of tyrants throughout history. The PAN crew is just the lastest iteration.

You ask how I feel about Obrador's appointment as Parallel President, or whatever they're calling it. My response is anything is better than a crew of thugs who used the military to protect a very few who loot the nations resources. Now if I'm wrong, if Mexico is really headed for social and economic justice, if foreign concerns or a few of the very rich are not looting the country, you let me know.

In the mean time, reflect on the violence, both florid as in the pictures and low grade as in the squalid conditions many people there suffer (unnecessarily squalid considering the great wealth of Mexico in human and natural resources).

And don't say I have no reason to point this out because the US has similar problems. WE opposed the war, we oppose it now, and we'll continue to oppose that and other outrages (like torture, OMG!). Our countries are linked in a very real way. Those links will evolve over time. When both nations are ruled by mature philosophies and honest leaders, then the relationship will flourish. Until then, there is a legitimate concern for events on both sides of the border (despite either nation's chauvinism).